Origin of noise in Ag K-Edge
Greetings, I recently did in-situ QEXAFS at Ag K-edge, expecting to see structure loss starting from crystalline (metallic) state. While we can see that, in addition we also see an increase in noise(?) in the xanes region (compare start and end in the attached image). I am confused by this because the amount of material did not change, so I did not expect a difference in the signal/noise ratio at the absorption edge. And it is reproducible across several samples, so not instrument related. Could anyone point me in the right direction as to what I am missing? Thank you! Best, Sebastian Kunze
Hello Sebastian:
The figure that you shared is interesting. Here are three observations/ things to check:
1. Is the integration time per point the same during the in-situ measurements? I think that it is otherwise the raw data would not be on the same scale as the other scans.
2. The raw data shows about the same edge step so I believe you are correct and the signal is the same in all the measurements, so somehow during the in-situ part additional noise was picked up. Was the in-situ apparatus causing some vibrations or noise in the measurement?
Kind regards,
Shelly
From: Ifeffit
Hi Sebastian, Is I0 the same for all measurements? Mu being about the same jump just means that about the same amount of absorber is in the beam. It doesn't rule out an instrumentation issue. Start by checking I0, then It. Identify where the noise is manifesting. -R. On 2024-04-29 5:17 a.m., Sebastian Kunze wrote:
Greetings, I recently did in-situ QEXAFS at Ag K-edge, expecting to see structure loss starting from crystalline (metallic) state. While we can see that, in addition we also see an increase in noise(?) in the xanes region (compare start and ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from outside your organization. ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd Greetings,
I recently did in-situ QEXAFS at Ag K-edge, expecting to see structure loss starting from crystalline (metallic) state. While we can see that, in addition we also see an increase in noise(?) in the xanes region (compare start and end in the attached image). I am confused by this because the amount of material did not change, so I did not expect a difference in the signal/noise ratio at the absorption edge. And it is reproducible across several samples, so not instrument related. Could anyone point me in the right direction as to what I am missing?
Thank you!
Best, Sebastian Kunze
_______________________________________________ Ifeffit mailing list Ifeffit@millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov https://urldefense.us/v3/__http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo... Unsubscribe:https://urldefense.us/v3/__http://millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/mailman/options/...
Sebastian,
What is happening “in situ”? Are you heating the sample, flowing gas, or changing some other external conditions?
The cleaner spectra are also those with larger oscillations, implying a more uniform local environment. That might suggest that the less clean spectra are from samples with more pinholes or non-uniformity in the bulk distribution of sample particles within the beam.
--Matt
From: Ifeffit
participants (4)
-
Kelly, Shelly Diane
-
Matthew Newville
-
Robert Gordon
-
Sebastian Kunze